American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Associationhttp://www.astda.org
American Sexually Transmitted Diseases AssociationMon, 23 Feb 2015 17:19:43 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0An Update from ASTDA President Kees Rietmeijerhttp://www.astda.org/an-update-from-astda-president-kees-rietmeijer/
http://www.astda.org/an-update-from-astda-president-kees-rietmeijer/#commentsMon, 26 Jan 2015 19:29:08 +0000http://www.astda.org/?p=371A belated happy new year to all! Despite the holidays, these have been busy times for ASTDA. In early December 2014, the Executive Committee (EC) had its annual in-person meeting. It was a very productive meeting, effectively mapping the future directions of the association. There was consensus that for ASTDA to be a more visible and effective organization, it needs to accomplish the following: better communication with its members and partners, enhancing support for the STD journal, and developing an advocacy role.

In terms of partnerships, over the years, ASTDA’s EC has had members that were also involved in sister organizations, including the American Sexual Health Association (ASHA), the National Coalition of STD Directors (NCSD), the International Union Against Sexually Transmitted Infections (IUSTI) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). However, these relationships were mostly coincidental and, with the exception of ASHA, never formalized. Yet to be more effective, ASTDA needs to be informed what colleagues in other organizations are doing and what their priorities are. Better still, it should be involved with setting a common agenda and identifying the role it is best suited to play in moving this agenda forward. Thus, the EC decided that it will submit a proposal to the ASTDA membership to amend its bylaws that will create voting ex-officio memberships for ASHA, NCSD, and IUSTI. There is a lot more to say about this and I will do so in a future blog.

This gets me to communication with our ASTDA membership. To the extent that, in the past, the association was mostly seen as the force behind the STD journal and the annual awards, perhaps much communication was not necessary. However, as we are trying to redefine the role of ASTDA in the changing STD environment, it is time to think about how to best establish open communication lines. I will certainly endeavor to submit regular updates through this blog, but will also communicate directly with ASTDA members when input is needed. Conversely, I hope that all members and also non-members would contact me with concerns and suggestions.

During the meeting in December, EC members also met with the new editor-in-chief of our journal Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Dr. Bill Miller. As much as we are grateful for all the years of service of the previous editor, Dr. Julius Schachter, new leadership brings new opportunities. At the meeting, Dr. Miller laid out some of his plans for the future and subsequently I interviewed him for STDPO – listen to his comments at this link. In short, he is truly committed to working with the ASTDA EC, and particularly with it publication committee to nurture relationships with young investigators and to also establish strong linkage with those working in STD programs, both in terms of selecting articles that are especially relevant for program and at the same time soliciting manuscripts from them. There are many program innovations that never see the light of publication, yet their dissemination would be of importance to others working in the field.

The third topic of discussion relates to advocacy and policy development – an area where, in my mind, ASTDA needs to find its voice. ASTDA has great resources. While the organization is financially in good shape, I am not talking about dollars. Rather, its major resource is its membership that represents the state of the science in STD: from the laboratory bench to diagnostics and from clinical care to prevention. We need to find a better way to harness this incredible resource in moving the field forward. Our experience with the issues around the naming of what is now the Distinguished Career Award, has demonstrated that an open forum format with the membership can be very effective and this could be one of several ways for interactive participation as we start looking into advocacy and policy statements and develop a mechanism by which we come to consensus.

Last week, ASTDA’s president-elect Dennis Fortenberry and I were invited for a “meet and greet” at the CDC Division of STD Prevention. It was a terrific event with plenary sessions and individual branch meetings. Many of the above topics were discussed and resonated well with our CDC colleagues. Among the suggestions we took home, there are two I want to mention here. They both relate to workforce development. First, though the STD clinical landscape is changing, there is a need to focus on quality improvement at publicly-funded STD clinics. CDC has started a collaborative process that will result in a guidelines document for quality STD clinical services. ASTDA is excited to be part of this process as it will assist us in identifying areas where we could prove useful in enhancing the STD clinical workforce. Second, and of more immediate relevance, is the fact that through the STD Prevention Training Centers, CDC is now requiring that each of the training centers have a medical fellow. In addition to their involvement with the training centers, the “curriculum” for these fellowships has not been determined. ASTDA, however, is very interested in supporting the PTCs in the scholarly development of the fellows and will look for ways to assist in the process.

]]>http://www.astda.org/an-update-from-astda-president-kees-rietmeijer/feed/0Impacthttp://www.astda.org/impact/
http://www.astda.org/impact/#commentsThu, 16 Oct 2014 14:11:47 +0000http://www.astda.org/?p=335Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (LWW) publishes the journal Sexually Transmitted Diseases owned by the American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association. As the current president of the Association I was invited to the annual LWW Journals Symposium held last month in Philadelphia. This was a great opportunity to learn more about the journal from a publisher’s perspective and also meet with colleagues representing over 100 medical journals that are (a small) part of the LWW portfolio.

As in so many other conferences and meetings these days, there was a lot of talk about impact. For a journal, impact can be defined and measured at different levels, including the contribution it makes to the publisher’s bottom line. On a more scientific level, the impact of a journal has traditionally been determined by its citation index, i.e. the ratio of the total number of citations a journal receives and the number of citable items published by the journal during a given time frame; usually 2 years.

For STD the impact factor was 2.7 in 2013 (up from 2.5 in 2012). In the category of infectious disease journals, this earns us a 32nd position after the likes of Lancet Infectious Diseases (#1 with a score of 19.4), Clinical Infectious Diseases (CID #2, 9.4), AIDS (#4, 6.5), Journal of Infectious Diseases (JID #5, 5.7), and also our European competitor Sexually Transmitted Infections (STI #27, 3.0). Not an Olympic qualifying score, to be sure.

The problem with the impact factor is that it is limited to giving an indication about the standing of the journal in academic circles. However, the impact on the real world of STD prevention is less clear. For example, an article may have great impact on people who influence policy and practice, but they are not typically the ones who write papers in the peer-reviewed literature where they would cite the manuscript that led them to develop a policy or change a guideline. Thus, we should be looking for other metrics to give us a more rounded view of a journal’s impact. One way of doing this is to look at online page views and downloads and these types of metrics are entering the main stream.

In the STD field we have yet another way of looking at this. Maybe there is no hard evidence for this, but I don’t think that anyone would argue with me that one of the most impactful publications in our field is the CDC STD Treatment Guidelines document. Based on extensive literature review and consensus meetings by a large panel of STD experts, the CDC publishes these guidelines every 4 years. The 2014 guidelines are likely to be published by year’s end and an electronic copy has been released for public input recently (available at this link). The PDF weighs in at a hefty 270 pages, including 55 pages of references. Everyone in our field should read the guidelines cover to cover at least once. But let me focus here on the references. Why? Well, the guidelines are evidence-based and all the evidence that is used to compile the Guidelines is found in the references. Thus one could argue that the impact of the Guidelines is primarily determined by the work that is done by the authors of those articles. Second, I had a preconceived idea where this little analysis would lead me.

The first thing that you find is the incredible scope of the reference material; I counted 194 different sources; the majority of them journal articles, but also conference abstracts, CDC and WHO reports, the Cochrane database, expert panel proceedings, etc. The reference list really is a testimony to the diligence, inquisitiveness, and thoroughness of the panel members. Few, if any stones were left unturned in providing the scientific base for the guidelines.

So, you might ask, what journal has the most citations? Answer: our venerable STD journal. And it is not even close. Of the 867 citations, 118 (13.6%) were from STD, followed by CID (65, 7.5%), STI (49, 5.6%), JID (39, 4.5%), and MMWR (36, 4.1%).

Don’t know about you, but I like this list a lot better than the one based on impact factor.
Now you might argue that STD only publishes STD-related articles and thus has a numerical advantage. True. You might also say that articles published in high-impact journals (like JAMA or the New England Journal of Medicine) might have greater impact on the STD field. Also true. Nonetheless, without reading too much into this analysis, I would venture to say that the impact of the STD journal on establishing the STD Treatment Guidelines and thus on STD clinical and prevention practice is substantial and much greater than one might suspect from the official impact factor.

This is the incredibly rich legacy that the outgoing STD Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Julius Schachter leaves us and it represents a wonderful starting point for Dr. Bill Miller who will be taking over Dr. Schachter’s role this coming January. I am very much looking forward to working with Bill in shaping the future of the journal. I am confident that he will assemble a stellar crew of editorial board members that will continue the high level of quality the journal has achieved. In addition, I hope that we all will continue to submit our best work to the journal. This will cement the journal’s role in providing the science base for our clinical and prevention work in the future. And, who knows, it might also increase its impact factor.

With disbelief and great sadness we are trying to absorb the news of the horrific events that claimed the lives of all 298 passengers on board the Malaysian Airways flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur. Among them were many of our colleagues who were traveling to the International AIDS Conference in Melbourne, dealing a terrible blow to the international HIV/STI community. We extend our heartfelt condolences to the victims’ family members, loved ones, friends and colleagues. As we grieve their loss, we will honor their legacy in pledging our unflagging commitment to continue their fight against AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections.

ASTDA is the nation’s most prestigious professional association of STD researchers, practitioners, and prevention specialists. Founded in 1948, the organization is dedicated to the control, prevention, and ultimate eradication of sexually transmitted infections, and supports research in medical, epidemiological, laboratory, social, and behavioral STD studies.

Brandie Taylor, PhD., M.P.H.

Each spring ASTDA offers a mentored Developmental Award to encourage new investigators to pursue an STD research career. Dr. Taylor’s Developmental Award will support the work outlined in her proposal Host Genetic Susceptibility to Chlamydia-Associated Reproductive Morbidity. Dr. Taylor is an Assistant Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics with the School of Public Health, Texas A&M University Health Science Center.

“ASTDA is thrilled to support this important research,” says Dr. Cornelis Reitmeijer, ASTDA President. “Untreated chlamydial infections are associated with a number of adverse reproductive effects, and Dr. Taylor’s research will no doubt help us better understand the role of genetics in these outcomes.”